[DRAFT] The future of education in @@NAME@@.

by **Uksania** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 10:59 am

This issue is about the curriculum of public schools. I have tried to include options to meet all tastes. Please suggest improvements.

The second draft:

Eligibility: Nation must have a decent public education system.

Description
@@NAME@@'s National Education Policy, last updated 20 years ago, is due for an overhaul. Recent deliberations have convinced everyone that a degree of general education is required. However, there is still much dispute over which fields of study will best serve the nation's future needs and deserve more emphasis.

1.a. [For Dictatorships]
"Our highest priority must be political stability," exclaims Party Chairman @@RANDOMNAME@@. "There have been increasing threats of a popular uprising. The best way to ensure stability is to indoctrinate children on the superiority of our ideology and leadership at a young age. We must prioritize ideological subjects above everything else."
Effect: schools teach the importance of supporting @@LEADER@@'s government but not how to.

1.b. [For Democracies]
"Our highest priority must be the preservation of democracy," exclaims mildly disfigured but highly competent legislator @@RANDOMNAME@@. "A recent study revealed that 73% of voters choose only based on appearance! We must prioritize political literacy and the relevant Humanities and Social Sciences, lest demagogues corrupt this country."
Effect: every house in @@NAME@@ is a think tank.

2. [All Nations]
"Internal political stability is useless without defense against foreign aggression." Barges in your paranoid Minister of Defence @@RANDOMNAME@@, who is convinced that @@NAME@@ can never be too careful. "We must do away traditional schools and enlist every child into military academies. This @@TYPE@@ will have no future otherwise!"
Effect: an army of @@POPULATIONVALUE@@ is perpetually ready to face an allegedly imminent threat.

3. [All Nations]
"Soldiers can't defend much without technology and their health," enters prominent bio-physical engineer @@RANDOMNAME@@, showcasing some of @@HIS@@ latest research. "@@NAME@@'s success today rests on the industrial revolution. Our schools must now teach for the next great leap. Emphasize education in the Natural and Medical Sciences."
Effect: @@DENONYM@@ children know much about the AdS/QCD correspondence but little about the supply and demand law.

4. [All Nations]
"Scientists cannot achieve anything in a crumbling economy," proclaims your Chief Economic Advisor @@RANDOMNAME@@, setting aside the engineer's files to place some complicated graphs and charts. "As you can see, the nation's economy will benefit most from an education system that places importance on vocational and managerial skills."
Effect: the government has renamed the Ministry of Education the Ministry of Human Resource Production.

The first draft:

by **Australian rePublic** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:13 pm

Why would anyone choose anything but the last option? With the exception of physcotic dictators, that is

by **Daarwyrth** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:23 pm

I agree with Australian rePublic, the last option needs to be cut out, I feel. It basically renders all the other options obsolete. As issues in NS need to have a certain dilemma, this would take away that challenging aspect of the issues, as it's basically the easiest and most perfect choice. It absolutely needs to be cut out of the draft if this issue is to function properly.

by **Australian rePublic** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:26 pm

Daarwyrth wrote:I agree with Australian rePublic, the last option needs to be cut out, I feel. It basically renders all the other options obsolete. As issues in NS need to have a certain dilemma, this would take away that challenging aspect of the issues, as it's basically the easiest and most perfect choice. It absolutely needs to be cut out of the draft if this issue is to function properly.

No what I'm saying is is that this whole issue wouldn't rven exist, because "all of the above" would be the option here

by **Daarwyrth** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:35 pm

Australian rePublic wrote:
Daarwyrth wrote:I agree with Australian rePublic, the last option needs to be cut out, I feel. It basically renders all the other options obsolete. As issues in NS need to have a certain dilemma, this would take away that challenging aspect of the issues, as it's basically the easiest and most perfect choice. It absolutely needs to be cut out of the draft if this issue is to function properly.

No what I'm saying is is that this whole issue wouldn't rven exist, because "all of the above" would be the option here

Ah, that way. I get your meaning.

It would indeed be a mistake for a country to have their curriculum only choose one of the approaches as described in the options. It would severely limit the students in their knowledge of the world. To solve this, perhaps the issue could clarify that it's about which elements the curriculum would put more emphasis on, in the sense that other subjects and such will still be taught, but matters regarding democracy or the military or science or whatever will receive special attention within the new curriculum. That way the core idea of the issue would still be preserved in a sense, while not making the mistake of severely debilitating the nation's educational system.

by **Uksania** » Mon Aug 03, 2020 7:48 pm

Australian rePublic wrote: No what I'm saying is is that this whole issue wouldn't rven exist, because "all of the above" would be the option here

I agree; the last option creates an easy way out. I'll remove it.

Daarwyrth wrote:To solve this, perhaps the issue could clarify that it's about which elements the curriculum would put more emphasis on, in the sense that other subjects and such will still be taught

Subject emphasis was my intention. I'll edit the wording to make this clearer.

Thank you for the suggestions Australian rePublic and Daarwyrth. I'll include them in the second draft.

by **Candlewhisper Archive** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 5:26 am

This issue covers too much ground I think. Back in the early days issues like #124 were fine, as there was a lot of ground to cover and the simulation was being painted in broad strokes. Now, with the number of issues well over a thousand, there's an expectation that stories will be a little less broad and a little more focused in what they're asking. Your question here "what is education for?" is simply too open.

by **Trotterdam** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:52 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:This issue covers too much ground I think. Back in the early days issues like #124 were fine, as there was a lot of ground to cover and the simulation was being painted in broad strokes. Now, with the number of issues well over a thousand, there's an expectation that stories will be a little less broad and a little more focused in what they're asking. Your question here "what is education for?" is simply too open.

Issues nowadays are usually more specific because most of the general issues have already been done. However, I don't remember this general issue already existing.

by **Minskiev** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:54 am

What if your nation isn’t 20 years old? Perhaps ‘in the days of the founder’ might work better?

Option 2: turn the B in barges lowercase.

by **Trotterdam** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:00 am

Minskiev wrote:What if your nation isn’t 20 years old? Perhaps ‘in the days of the founder’ might work better?

If your nation is less than 20 years old, there's a good chance the founder is still alive.

by **Minskiev** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:02 am

Trotterdam wrote:
Minskiev wrote:What if your nation isn’t 20 years old? Perhaps ‘in the days of the founder’ might work better?
If your nation is less than 20 years old, there's a good chance the founder is still alive.

Hmm, good point. Then, ‘the early days’?

by **Trotterdam** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:10 am

I think the nation being more than 20 years old is a reasonable assumption to make. Issues already make plenty of assumptions, and it makes more sense than if a centuries-old nation hasn't updated its education policy in all that time. Or even, for that matter, had an education policy centuries ago, given how different government worked back then.

by **Minskiev** » Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:17 am

Trotterdam wrote:I think the nation being more than 20 years old is a reasonable assumption to make. Issues already make plenty of assumptions, and it makes more sense than if a centuries-old nation hasn't updated its education policy in all that time. Or even, for that matter, had an education policy centuries ago, given how different government worked back then.

That could work well. Ancient @@NAME@@ doesn’t assume the government, so that’s a plus. Or, would it be Middle @@NAME@@?

[DRAFT] The future of education in @@NAME@@.

[DRAFT] The future of education in @@NAME@@.

Who is online